Amizu Japan

Is It Legal to Translate a Japanese Knitting Pattern? What Japanese Copyright Sources Actually Say

Translating a Japanese knitting pattern, sharing it, or selling what you make: what Japan's Copyright Act, one court case and publishers' terms say.

By Naruhiko (Naru) ·

Drafted in English with AI, from the sources listed at the end. How these guides are made.

On this page
  1. The three situations
  2. What the Copyright Act says (English translation)
  3. The knitting-chart court case
  4. What publishers and yarn makers say
  5. International frameworks
  6. Practical lower-risk habits
  7. FAQ
  8. Sources

Not legal advice. This guide collects what published sources say about Japanese copyright law and knitting patterns. It was not written or reviewed by a lawyer, it can’t tell you how a court would treat your situation, and the law of your own country may apply as well. If money or a publisher’s reaction is on the line, ask a qualified lawyer or the publisher.

Short answer: It depends on what you’re doing. Translating a pattern for your own use is expressly allowed by Japan’s Copyright Act. Publishing or selling your translation involves the translation right the Act gives the author. Making and selling an item from a pattern is where the sources split: one lawyer says that if a pattern isn’t a protected work, doing so doesn’t infringe, while some publishers forbid selling items made from their books, and the yarn maker Hamanaka allows it only for patterns it marks for personal commercial use.

The three situations

What you want to doWhat the sources sayWhere the uncertainty is
1. Translate a pattern for yourself (or family)Japan’s Copyright Act allows reproduction for private use (Art. 30(1)), and that use may also be made by translation (Art. 47-6(1)(i))This is Japanese law only; your own country’s law is separate and may differ. Japan’s private use is limited to personal, family or similarly limited use
2. Publish, share widely or sell your translationTranslating is a right reserved to the author (Art. 27); the original author also holds rights over how a translation is used (Art. 28)Which parts of a pattern are protected: the Act lists literary and photographic works among its examples, and the court case below ruled on one structure in one plaintiff’s charts; limited quotation may be allowed (Art. 32)
3. Make and sell items from a patternA lawyer quoted by Bengo4.com says that if the pattern isn’t a work, making and selling items from it doesn’t infringe; Boutique-sha refuses commercial use; Hamanaka allows it only for patterns marked 個人商用利用可 (kojin shōyō riyō ka, “personal commercial use OK”)Publisher terms vs. the statute; the marketplace’s own rules; the designer’s terms

The English quotations below are from the Japanese government’s Japanese Law Translation database, whose text reflects amendments through Act No. 52 of 2021. The Japanese text of each quoted provision was compared with the current text on e-Gov, the government’s law database, on October 23, 2026, and the quoted passages are unchanged. (Later amendments changed other parts of Articles 47-6 and 119, such as the wording of the penalty, but not the passages quoted here.)

What is protected. Article 2(1)(i) defines a “work” as “a creatively produced expression of thoughts or sentiments that falls within the literary, academic, artistic, or musical domain.” Article 10(1) lists examples that include “novels, scenarios, articles, lectures, and other literary works,” “photographic works,” and “maps and other diagrams of an academic nature, such as plans, charts, and models.” Whether a knitting chart can be one of those “diagrams” is a question the court case below leaves open.

Translation is the author’s right. Article 27: “The author of a work has the exclusive right to translate that work, compose a musical arrangement of it, reformulate it, dramatize it, make a cinematographic adaptation of it, or otherwise adapt the work.” Article 2(1)(xi) defines a “derivative work” as “a work that a person creates by translating… or otherwise adapting a pre-existing work.” Article 28 says the author of the original work “holds exclusive rights in the same categories” as the author of the derivative work, in connection with the derivative work’s exploitation. Article 11 adds that protecting a derivative work “does not affect the rights of the author of the original work.” Read together: a translation of a protected text is a derivative work, and the original author holds rights over how that translation is used.

Private use. Article 30(1): “Except in the following cases, a user may reproduce a work that is subject to copyright… if the reproduction is for personal or family use or for any other use of a similarly limited scope (hereinafter referred to as “private use”).” The four listed exceptions are copying on an automated copier set up for use by the public; copying made possible by circumventing technological protection measures, knowing that; digital sound or video recording from an online transmission that infringes copyright, knowing that it does; and other digital copying from such a transmission, knowing that it infringes (with exceptions for minor portions and special circumstances). Article 47-6(1)(i) then lists “translation, musical arrangement, reformulation, or adaptation” as means by which a use permitted under Article 30(1) may also be made. So under Japanese law, translating for private use is expressly covered.

Quotation. Article 32(1): “It is permissible to quote and thereby exploit a work that has been made public. In such a case, the work must be quoted consistent with fair practices and within a scope that is justified for the purpose of news reporting, critique, study, or other place in which the work is quoted.” Article 47-6(1)(ii) lets a quotation under Article 32 be made by translation. Quoting a small piece with a clear purpose may be allowed; “fair practices” and “justified scope” are judgment calls, not bright lines.

Duration. Under Article 51(2), copyright generally lasts until 70 years after the author’s death. Under Article 53(1), a work under the name of a company or other organization is protected for 70 years after it is made public (or 70 years after its creation, if it isn’t made public within 70 years of its creation).

Enforcement. Article 112(1) lets rights holders demand that infringement stop or be prevented. Article 119(1) sets criminal penalties for infringement, but expressly excludes “one that personally reproduces a work or performance, etc. for the purpose of private use.”

The knitting-chart court case

The court case that the Bengo4.com article below cites was decided by the Tokyo District Court on December 26, 2011 (平成22年(ワ)第39994号) and upheld by the IP High Court on April 25, 2012 (平成24年(ネ)第10004号). Both judgments are published on the Japanese courts’ official website.

The facts. The plaintiff had designed two hand-knit women’s vests, 三角パズルベスト (sankaku pazuru besuto, “triangle puzzle vest”), and written knitting charts (編み図, amizu) for them. The defendants, a yarn company and a knitting teacher, produced, sold and distributed a knitted piece and copies of a chart, and the plaintiff claimed they copied the vests and charts. The plaintiff based the claim on one structure: right triangles paired along their longest sides into four-sided shapes, five of those joined in a ring, and two such rings joined together.

What the courts held. The district court held that this structure was not expression but “an abstract concept or idea of making a garment with such a structure.” On the charts, it wrote:

原告編み図に本件構成が表示されている点は，思想又はアイデアを表示したにとどまるものというべきであり，この点をもって，原告編み図に著作物性を認めることはできない (“The fact that the structure is shown in the plaintiff’s knitting charts must be regarded as merely displaying a thought or idea, and on this point the plaintiff’s knitting charts cannot be recognized as a work.”)

The IP High Court agreed: 「上記構成を根拠として原告編み物に著作物性を認めることはできず，原告編み図についても著作物性を認めることはできない」 (“On the basis of that structure, the plaintiff’s knitted pieces cannot be recognized as works, and neither can the plaintiff’s knitting charts”).

How far the case goes.

  1. One design, one claimed basis. The courts ruled on the triangle structure the plaintiff relied on. The district court said it would not examine the vests’ concrete features, such as changes in stitch direction, overlapping stitches, the colors of each motif and the choice of fabric, because the plaintiff did not base the claim on them.
  2. No general rule on charts. The district court also examined the charts as a whole “just in case” (念のため, nen no tame), as an artistic work and as a “work of diagrams” (図面の著作物, zumen no chosakubutsu). For a diagram, it said, creativity depends on ingenuity in how easy a chart is to read and how clearly it explains the knitting, and it found none because the plaintiff’s charts followed the usual way of drawing knitting charts. The IP High Court deleted that part of the reasoning. So the final judgment rests on the idea point alone, and it doesn’t say whether knitting charts in general can be works of diagrams.
  3. Text and photographs weren’t at issue. The case was about knitted pieces and their charts. A book’s written instructions and photographs may fall under the Act’s own examples of literary and photographic works.

One lawyer’s reading. A Bengo4.com News article (May 13, 2024) asked lawyer 井奈波朋子 (Tomoko Inaba) of 龍村法律事務所 (Tatsumura Hōritsu Jimusho) about making and selling items from handmade books. The answer begins by noting that 「いろいろな書籍があると思いますので、一般化はできませんが、通常のハンドメイド本であることを前提に検討します」 (“There are many kinds of books, so this can’t be generalized, but I’ll assume an ordinary handmade book”). It cites the 2011 case and concludes:

一般的なハンドメイド作品やその図面については、著作物と認められる可能性は低く、著作物でないとすると、その図面にしたがって編み物を作ったり、刺繍をした場合であっても、著作権を侵害するとはいえません。また、作った作品を売り買いしても、著作権法に抵触することはありません。 (“Ordinary handmade works and their diagrams are unlikely to be recognized as works, and if they are not works, knitting or embroidering by following the diagram cannot be said to infringe copyright. Buying and selling the finished pieces does not conflict with the Copyright Act either.”)

That is one lawyer’s view, and it depends on the pattern not being a work. The judgments themselves ruled on one design.

What publishers and yarn makers say

Publishers and makers add their own terms on top of the statute, and some state them as copyright rules.

Boutique-sha (ブティック社, Butikku-sha), on its 著作権について (Chosakuken ni tsuite, “About copyright”) page. On November 5, 2026, the live site still showed a maintenance notice (in place since October 22, 2026, with no end time given), so these quotations are from the Internet Archive copy of September 21, 2026:

本誌掲載の写真・イラスト・カット・記事・キット等一切の転載・複写(コピー・スキャン他)・インターネットでの使用を禁じます。また、作品及びそのデザインは個人的に楽しむ場合を除き、製作・販売することは著作権法で禁じられています。 (“Reprinting, copying (photocopying, scanning, etc.) or using on the internet any photos, illustrations, spot illustrations, articles, kits, etc. in this magazine is prohibited. In addition, making or selling the works and their designs, except for personal enjoyment, is prohibited by the Copyright Act.”)

Under the heading 「記事や掲載作品の販売など営利目的に関して」 (“On commercial purposes, such as selling the articles or the published works”):

インターネット上の各種販売サイト・個人売買マーケット、SNS、並びに実店舗やフリーマーケット、バザーなど、数量・金額・手段・目的を問わず全てお断りしております。この件につきましてはお電話、メール等によるお問合せは受けつけておりません。 (“We decline all of it, whether on online sales sites, person-to-person marketplaces or social media, or in physical stores, at flea markets, bazaars and so on, regardless of quantity, price, means or purpose. We do not accept phone, email or other inquiries about this.”)

The same section says that similar items made with reference to the book’s finished photos, instructions and diagrams can’t be used for commercial purposes either.

Bunka Publishing Bureau (文化出版局, Bunka Shuppan-kyoku). J-CAST News reported (April 20, 2024) that the publisher’s sales department posted on X on April 17, 2024 that copying all or part of a work shown in its books and selling it 「著作権法の違反行為になります」 (“is a violation of the Copyright Act”). J-CAST also reported that the handmade marketplace Creema tells sellers to follow each book’s rules, that items can’t be sold when a book says commercial use is prohibited, and to ask the publisher when a book says nothing.

Hamanaka (ハマナカ), the yarn maker, publishes a 商用利用ガイドライン (shōyō riyō gaidorain, commercial-use guidelines) for items made with its yarn and its own patterns. Items for sale should in principle be the maker’s own original designs: 「販売ができるものは原則的に制作者様のオリジナル作品に限ります。」 As an exception, only recipes marked 「個人商用利用可」 (kojin shōyō riyō ka, “personal commercial use OK”) may be used. A chart marked that way may be used for items to sell if they are made with the yarn the chart specifies (color changes are fine), but the charts themselves may not be altered, copied, sold, resold or lent. Sales are for individuals only, Hamanaka’s logo may not go on tags, and Hamanaka’s own photos may not be used in listings.

Nihon Vogue (日本ヴォーグ社, Nihon Vōgu-sha). Its shop sells at least one book whose title starts 「商用利用OK」 (shōyō riyō OK, “commercial use OK”), a sewing book of bag patterns. No general terms page on selling items made from its books turned up on its shop or company sites.

These positions differ from the lawyer’s reading above. The notices state each company’s position, and the Bengo4.com article states one lawyer’s. None of them is a court ruling on your item.

International frameworks

Japan is a contracting party to the Berne Convention (accession April 18, 1899, in force July 15, 1899, per WIPO Lex). The Copyright Act’s Article 6(iii) protects works that Japan “is under the obligation to protect pursuant to an international treaty.” Under Berne Article 5(1), authors enjoy, outside the country of origin, “the rights which their respective laws do now or may hereafter grant to their nationals,” and Article 8 gives authors “the exclusive right of making and of authorizing the translation of their works.”

None of the sources above says which country’s law applies to a translation made and posted outside Japan, or what exceptions your own country has. That is a question for a lawyer where you live.

Practical lower-risk habits

These are not legal advice. They follow from the sources above.

  • For yourself: translate for your own use and keep it private.
  • To share: explain how to read the symbols in your own words (as in how to read a Japanese knitting chart), with your own diagrams and photos, and link to the book instead of copying from it.
  • To quote: keep it short, name the source, and have a clear purpose (Article 32’s “fair practices” and “justified scope”).
  • To sell items: check the book or magazine (for example, the titles in the guide to Japan’s knitting magazines) for a commercial-use statement, check the publisher’s or yarn maker’s terms, and check the marketplace’s rules. If in doubt, ask the publisher, though Boutique-sha says it doesn’t take phone or email questions about this.
  • Avoid: scanning and posting pages, or copying a book’s text, photos or charts. Boutique-sha’s notice prohibits reprinting and copying its content, Hamanaka says its charts may not be copied, and Article 32 allows only limited quotation.

FAQ

Can I translate a Japanese pattern for myself? Japan’s Copyright Act allows reproduction for private use (Art. 30(1)), and that use may also be made by translation (Art. 47-6(1)(i)). This is Japanese law; your own country’s law is separate and may differ. Japan’s private use means personal, family or similarly limited use.

Can I post my translation online? Publishing a translation involves the author’s translation right (Art. 27) and the original author’s rights over a derivative work (Art. 28). The court case covered here ruled on one structure in one plaintiff’s charts, so it doesn’t settle charts in general. You can write your own instructions instead, or ask the publisher for its position.

Can I sell something I made from a Japanese pattern book? A lawyer quoted by Bengo4.com says that if the pattern isn’t a protected work, knitting from it and selling the result doesn’t infringe copyright. Boutique-sha’s notice refuses commercial use in all cases, and Hamanaka allows sales only from its patterns marked 個人商用利用可. Check the book, the publisher’s terms and the marketplace’s rules.

Is a knitting chart protected by copyright? In the 2011–2012 case, the courts held that the triangle structure of one designer’s vests was an abstract idea, so neither the vests nor their charts were protected on that basis. The appeal court removed the trial court’s wider discussion of charts as diagrams, so the case doesn’t settle whether knitting charts in general are protected. The Act does list “diagrams of an academic nature” among its examples of works.

What about the Berne Convention? Japan is a member. Berne gives authors an exclusive translation right (Art. 8) and national treatment (Art. 5(1)). It doesn’t tell you what your own country’s exceptions are.

Again: not legal advice. If you’re planning to publish or sell something based on a Japanese pattern, talk to a qualified lawyer in your country and, where possible, ask the publisher or designer directly.

Sources

All pages below were opened on October 23, 2026 (the Boutique-sha page through its Internet Archive copy of September 21, 2026).